mathemachristian[he]

💯

https://hexbear.net/post/3739639 Assuming you’re going after this line of thinking:

There is, at the same time, an argument that all sex work is inherently assault, and as such to term it work is to ignore the reality of the sex trade’s exploitative nature.

“Part of believing me when I say I have beenremovedd is believing me when I say I haven’t been.” - Nikita, 2017 Annual General Meeting of Amnesty International UK.

“Prostitution is only a particular expression of the universal prostitution of the worker” - Karl Marx

their “mentally ill warhawks” (nice ableism btw) our “freedom conscious people”

glowie

found the nazi, fuck off back to 4chan

we do get that a lot here though, snarky, canned oneliners for that upvote serotonin boost. But this bizarre phenomon wiht people pavlov’d into posting certain canned redditisms is much less

You can block instances

I think talking with his boss, your boss and HR (possibly all in one meeting) sounds like a reasonable first step.

Talk about the nuclear option!! That’s a meeting HR calls in when someone is about to get fired!!

I think talking with your boss would be the best thing if talking with Noisy Guy directly is not something you think is feasible. That would be the first step to escalation, talking to someone elses boss or human resources directly is typically frowned upon I believe since corporations have a very hierarchical structure and stepping outside of that is very uncommon. If enough people talk to your boss about it they might be able to escalate it further, if it’s a demonstrably sufficiently large problem (i.e. it affects ROI somehow) then it might get escalated up to someone who is directly above Noisy Guy and can do something about it.

HR isn’t really for interpersonal problems, it is the branch of the corporation that deals with the legalese of having people in employ. I. e. Hiring/firing, wage payment and issues, vacation days etc. anything that (potentially) touches upon legal issues. If you have anything protected under law then that’s HR’s job. But even then, “troublemakers”, for example people filing complaints about illegal sexual harassment, should be aware that the company’s interest is to it’s profit line first and will only do as much as it can be prosecuted for. If they have to fire the harasser they will, but that’s a loss on their part and if they believe that this could be recurring problem with the victim they’d rather terminate the victims employment to mitigate their loss. HR’s primary concern is shielding the corporation from legal harm and they care about your work environment only in as much as it affects your output. So if employing you is more trouble than it’s worth, you’re gone.

Exceptions, variations apply of course and are typically tied to the corporations size.

My approach, depending on your boss, talk to them about how it’s affecting you personally if they’re amiable to you. If they like you they might relate and want to solve it because people like helping each other, but give them something about how it hurts collective performance so they can argue why this problem needs a solution to their higher ups. Know your and your colleagues works worth. If what you produce is absolutely vital to the companies success then wham bam they should be out of there. If you are easily replaced, you need to be a bit more diplomatic. As always there is more power in collective bargaining than individual.

Bir örnek, mesela bu mesajın türkçe çevirisini, yazabilir misin?

I don’t think it’s as easy to see, but grammar wise it’s really simple. No articles (not even a “the”), there is no concept of “definite” and “indefinite” grammar wise. Things either are defined (my house, that house) or not (any house, one house, two houses) or it doesn’t matter (I’m going to house) grammar wise, no difference.

And really anything is made with suffixes, the only thing that I would consider problematic is remembering the correct order of suffixes. For example above:

çevir-i-si-ni

çevir(-mek): to turn around, exchange, translate
çevir-i: the thing that got turned around, exchanged, translated
çeviri-(s)i: the messages’s (turkish) translation, a genitive construct where message has the genitive ending (-in) and the corresponding possessive suffix (-(s)i) binds them together.
çevirisi-(n)i: accusative case, relating it to “writing”, i. e. write the messages turkish translation.

There are quite a few rules governing vowels and consonants in suffixes but they are highly regular. There are very few exceptions that need to be learned seperately. (and even a lot those can be turned into rules, though I suppose at some point the difference hardly matters)

Türkçe not gendered (at all, everyone and everything is “o”) and one of the easiest languages to learn

Economy and social liberties are not independent axes. The mode of production of a society influences it’s social life and the liberties afforded.

Tan is the tao out of which the sin and cos arise

People fed up with the the (false) sin/cos dichotomy and want to get people to use tan more often.

this is like the only instance ever, was a business and not affiliated with the russian government, US republicans paid for an ad campaign in 2015 and it got completely shut down 2 years ago. And yet the phantasm of the russian bot that is spamming on lemmy lives on in the lore of libs.

Ornamental Charlie Kirk Memorial Fountain

This has been an ongoing theme with western reporting since before Yeltsin. Please challenge the information you got about the USSR from their main adversary. Evergreen quote:

In the United States, for over a hundred years, the ruling interests tirelessly propagated anticommunism among the populace, until it became more like a religious orthodoxy than a political analysis. During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. […]

from Blackshirts and Reds by Michael Parenti

This is about a very specific nuclear treaty that is about to expire at a set date in the near future and they are calling for restrictions on nuclear armament. It’s neither vague nor a threat!

Don’t they know that credit cards don’t work down at the ol’ nuk-u-lar store 🤣🤣

?? They are calling for compliance with the treaty’s quantitative restrictions?? How is this a threat??

The store pulls its own profits in by how many people shop there and part of that profit, is distributing to those who work there.

No, profit by definition is what’s left after all the expenses, including wages. Your wages are completely independent of profit and only dependent on the market value of your laborforce. The store could be raking in huge amounts of profits, if the competition among the laborers is fierce, wages will be minimal. Or the other way around, profit margins could already be razor thin, but if the competiton among the laborers is minimal then wages have to be high if they want to attract laborers.

Please read “wage labor & capital” where it’s all spelled out if you want to learn more. (It’s a short read)

Shoplifting only hurts corporate since it eats into the profits which are independent of the wage.